Simon

From the measurements last week I obtained the calibration of the system:

R_surf = AC_surfref/(DC_surfref*P_in*abs_surfref) = 24.9 [1/W]
where AC_surfref = 0.75V, DC_surfref = 4.15V, P_in = 0.033W and abs_surfref = 0.22

R_bulk = AC_bulkref/(DC_bulkref*sqrt(T_bulkref)*P_in*abs_bulkref) = 0.535 [cm/W]
where AC_bulkref = 0.083V, DC_bulkref = 4.7V, T_bulkref = 0.55, P_in = 0.033W and abs_bulkref = 1.04/cm

As can be seen, the calibration factor of the surface reference seems to be a lot higher than for the measurements done in July (-> 16). Probably, because I did not pay attention to the orientation of the surface sample
The bulk-sample, however, is not so far away from the values of past calibration measurements (-> 0.604 in July). That gives me at least some confidence about the calibration so far.

Furthermore, today I restarted the laser and put the ETMY test-mass on the translation stage again.
I started a Z-scan with ~2W input power to check the positions of the surfaces. Also from this measurements, the crossing point seems to be shifted by 2mm (center is now at 77!), which is consistent with the calibration.

I increased the laser power to ~10W and ran a rough map to check that the test-mass can hold that power in the whole map area. Fortunately, there seems to be no problem so far. Apparently, we were successful in removing all the soot and FC remains.

I started the mapping at the test-mass' center.